Benchmark: Test_Currency - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

forEach
const currency = [{ usd: 5 }, { uah: 10 }, { usd: 3 }]; const merge = (data) => { const res = {}; data.forEach((item) => { for (let [key, value] of Object.entries(item)) { !res[key] ? (res[key] = value) : (res[key] += value); } }); return res; };
Reduce
const currency = [{ usd: 5 }, { uah: 10 }, { usd: 3 }]; const result = currency.reduce((res, item) => { for (const [key, value] of Object.entries(item)) { !res[key] ? (res[key] = value) : (res[key] = res[key] + value); } return res; }, {});

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
forEach
Reduce

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/87.0.4280.88 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 87 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
forEach	653580032.0 Ops/sec
Reduce	376251.1 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided benchmark definition is a JSON object that contains metadata about the benchmark:

* `Name`: The name of the benchmark, which is "Test_Currency".
* `Description`: An empty string, indicating that no description was provided.
* `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code`: Empty strings, suggesting that no script or HTML preparation code is required.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **"forEach"`**
	* The benchmark definition consists of a JavaScript script that creates an array of currency objects with "usd", "uah", and "usd" properties.
	* It then defines a function called `merge` that takes an array of objects as input. The function iterates through each object, and for each property, it checks if the key already exists in the result object (`res`). If not, it sets the value; otherwise, it increments the existing value using the `+=` operator.
	* The test case is executed multiple times to measure its performance.

2. **"Reduce"`**
	* Similar to the previous test case, but instead of using the `forEach` method, it uses the `reduce` method from the Array prototype.
	* The script creates an array of currency objects with "usd", "uah", and "usd" properties.
	* It then defines a function called `result` that takes the array as input. The function iterates through each object, and for each property, it checks if the key already exists in the result object (`res`). If not, it sets the value; otherwise, it increments the existing value using the `+=` operator.
	* However, there's a subtle difference between the two scripts: in the `forEach` script, the increment is done using `res[key] += value`, while in the `Reduce` script, it's done using `res[key] = res[key] + value`. This change affects the performance of each benchmark.

**Options Compared**

The test cases compare two approaches to merge data from an array of objects:

1. **"forEach"`**: Uses a simple iterative approach with the `forEach` method.
2. **"Reduce"`**: Uses the `reduce` method, which applies a cumulative function to each element in the array.

**Pros and Cons**

* **"forEach"`**:
	+ Pros: Simple, intuitive, and easy to understand.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of iteration and the need for explicit increment logic.
* **"Reduce"`**:
	+ Pros: Can be faster because it uses a single function call and avoids explicit iteration.
	+ Cons: Requires knowledge of the `reduce` method and its syntax.

In terms of performance, the `Reduce` approach might have an edge due to its concise syntax and reduced overhead. However, for simple, straightforward use cases like this one, the differences in performance may not be noticeable.

**Library**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. The `reduce` method is a built-in function of the Array prototype in JavaScript.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None are explicitly used in these benchmarks. Both examples use standard JavaScript syntax and do not utilize any special features like async/await, generators, or modern JavaScript syntax (e.g., arrow functions, destructuring).

**Other Alternatives**

For similar performance testing of merge operations, other alternatives might include:

1. **Iterating with `for` loops**: This approach would involve explicit iteration using a traditional `for` loop instead of the `forEach` method.
2. **Using a third-party library**: Depending on the specific requirements, libraries like Lodash or Ramda might provide optimized implementations for merge operations.
3. **Benchmarking frameworks**: Other benchmarking frameworks, such as Benchmark.js or perf_hooks, might offer more advanced features and tools for performance testing.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may require additional setup or configuration to work with MeasureThat.net's framework.

Related benchmarks:

Test_Currency (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: forEach vs Reduce

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

forEach

Reduce

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):